this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2023
74 points (84.9% liked)

Starfield

2859 readers
1 users here now

Welcome to the Starfield community on Lemmy.zip!

Helpful links:

Spoiler policy:

Post & comment spoiler syntax:

<spoiler here>

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Draegur@lemm.ee 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

let us presume that Video Game N has 100 currency in it budget.

The studio producing Video Game N spends 90 currency on essentially nothing, by purchasing contracts with shell companies owned by their own board of investors, then they take the remaining 10 currency and offshore basically ALL of the actual productive work to 50 developers. Those 50 developers must split the 10 currency between each other while collectively doing 100 currency's worth of work.

I want them to get paid 100 currency.

I do not think "they should be grateful to get 1/100th of what they deserve" is a productive or helpful position to hold.

If the available budgets of these games were not squandered on laundering and graft, and less spread thin across a vast army of people who barely get to take home pennies on the hour, it would be a good thing, you see.

[–] LoamImprovement@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And even if you can't have empathy for sweatshop workers who are getting paid 1/100th of what they're worth, I think it's inarguable that a studio that devotes the smallest possible fraction of its budget to producing a game will turn out an overall worse product than one developed with the full budget.

[–] Draegur@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

And then we wonder why games from "AAA" studios kinda suck now.

Well there's our problem: they rigged the budget for maximum graft.